Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-22-Speech-1-106"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011022.7.1-106"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, while, in many areas, the European legislation which we produce here is often openly criticised – quite rightly – we should recognise that the 1985 directive on undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities was, for once, a masterpiece. The success it has had in the investment fund sector and with the clients of these funds bears witness to this. It has also become an example for legislation on a world scale. Since it entered into force in 1989, not only have the assets of the UCITSs increased dramatically, but also cross-border trade has developed very strongly. It has therefore achieved the objectives it was intended for.
However, if, after ten years, this directive needs a ‘facelift’ in order to adapt to the evolution of the markets, to the increasingly sophisticated financial products available, I remain concerned about the fate of the older funds, which do not meet the new demands. That is why I had advocated a clause for these funds, a so-called ‘grandfather’ clause, which would be unrestricted. Also in this field there are acquired rights, which it would be unfair to modify in a backdated fashion. If there is no such clause, there will be a significant risk of market insecurity, which would have disastrous effects on the performance of the funds, prejudicing not only the industry but also the investors. And above all, the weaker consumers, who do not keep so up-to-date with financial matters and who therefore react more slowly to them, will be the most affected.
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has finally expressed its preference for a clause which is restricted in time. This is the lesser evil, even if this clause may have negative effects, in terms of competition, for the older UCITSs, all of which will probably not be able to adapt to the new provisions of the directive in the best operational and financial conditions.
Mr President, I therefore hope that the House will vote in favour of this restricted clause. Please allow me to point out that I am also opposed to the amendment by Mr Goebbels, which would have the effect of delaying, indeed sacrificing, the modified directive, which we are able to live with, despite its shortcomings – but it would appear to be a lost cause from the outset. Mr Goebbels would do well, I believe, to withdraw his amendment. He can put it in cold storage until there is a better occasion to table it once again."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples